Trinity River Mainstem Restoration Executive Summary

Executive Summary
Introduction
The Trinity River, located in northwest California, has historically been a major producer of
fish and wildlife resources. Of special importance to humans has been the abundant
chinook and coho salmon and steelhead. For thousands of years, members of the Hoopa,
Yurok, and other tribes depended on the rich and bountiful Trinity River fishery. The first
non-Indians to the region also used the fishery. Historic records of fish abundance are
problematic; however, one estimate suggested that 168,000 chinook salmon migrated into
the Klamath/Trinity River watershed as recently as the mid-twentieth century (half of
which may have entered the Trinity River).
In 1955, Congress authorized the construction of Lewiston and Trinity Dams on the Trinity
River, and associated structures to export water into the Central Valley of California. From
1965-97 approximately 74 percent of Trinity=s water above Lewiston was exported. The
dramatically reduced instream flows resulted in substantial detrimental changes to the
river, with associated declines in anadromous fish production.
In 1981, the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) directed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) to conduct a study of the effectiveness of increased flows in restoring salmon and
steelhead populations. The Central Valley Project Improvement Act (CVPIA) of 1992
(Public Law 102-575) directed the Secretary to complete the study and—provided the Hoopa
Valley Tribe concur—implement accordingly. In 1994, an Environmental Impact
Statement/Report was initiated to evaluate a range of alternatives to restore the natural
production of anadromous fish on the mainstem Trinity River.
This Executive Summary presents an overview of the Trinity River Mainstem Fishery
Restoration Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report
(FEIS/EIR).
Purpose and Need for the Action
The purpose of the proposed action is to restore and maintain the natural production of anadromous
fish on the Trinity River mainstem downstream of Lewiston Dam. The need for this action results
from Congress:
(1) mandate that diversions of water from the Trinity River to the Central Valley Project not be
detrimental to Trinity River fish and wildlife resources; (2) finding that construction and operation of
the Trinity River Diversion (TRD), as well as other factors, have contributed to detrimental effects to
habitat and have resulted in drastic reductions in anadromous fish populations; (3) finding that
restoration of depleted stocks of naturally produced anadromous fish is critical to the dependent tribal,
commercial, and sport fisheries; and (4) confirmation of the federal trust responsibility to protect
tribal fishery resources affected by the TRD.
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC ( CAH619.DOC) I
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
For purposes of the FEIS/EIR Arestore@ is defined as reviving the well-being, vitality, and
use thereof. The Trinity River FEIS/EIR does not establish specific salmon population
targets due to the complexity, uncertainty, and confounding factors in identifying and
monitoring such targets. Instead, the FEIS/EIR is premised on a Ahealthy river@ concept.
The FEIS/EIR assumes that restoration of pre-dam attributes—such as alternate bar
sequences, effective sediment transport, and dynamic riparian communities—will result in
the restoration of anadromous fish production.
The purpose and need for the proposed action is supported by legislative, executive, and
judicial authorities and decisions. Among the more prominent is the Trinity River Act of
1955 (P.L. 84-386), which stated that water diversions from the Trinity should not be
detrimental to the river and that the Secretary Aadopt appropriate measures to insure the
preservation and propagation of fish and wildlife@ in the Trinity River Basin. In January
1981, the Secretary signed a Secretarial Decision directing the Service to conduct a 12-year
Trinity River Flow Evaluation Study (TRFE) summarizing the effectiveness of flow
restoration to restore the fishery. The Secretary=s action was based in part on tribal trust
responsibilities. In 1984, the Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Management Restoration
Project Act (P.L. 98-541) authorized programs Ato restore natural fish and wildlife
populations to levels approximating those which existed immediately prior to the
construction of the Trinity Division.@ In October 1992, the CVPIA was enacted by Congress.
It directed the Secretary to develop recommendations for permanent instream flow
requirements, TRD operating criteria, and procedures for restoring and maintaining the
Trinity River fishery. The act acknowledged the federal government=s trust responsibility to
the Hoopa Valley Tribe by requiring tribal involvement in the TRFE and by increasing the
interim instream releases (to 340,000 acre-feet/year [af/yr]) to restore the fishery. In 1996,
amendments to the 1984 Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Management Act (P.L. 104-
143) clarified that Arestoration is to be measured not only by returning adult anadromous
fish spawners, but by the ability of dependent tribal, commercial, and sport fisheries to
participate fully Y in the benefits of restoration.@
Tribal Trust
The Hoopa Valley, Karuk, Klamath, and Yurok Tribes are officially recognized by the
federal government, with the Hoopa Valley and Yurok Tribes being most strongly
associated with the Trinity River. Tribal issues are prominent in the FEIS/EIR.
The Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation was established in 1864. The reservation generally
consists of a 144-square-mile block of land bisected by the lower Trinity River. In 1988,
Congress, via the Hupa-Yurok Settlement Act (P.L. 100-580), established the Yurok Indian
Reservation, which is bisected by the lower Klamath River. Several court rulings have
established that an important AIndian purpose@ for the reservations was to reserve the tribes=
rights to take fish from the Klamath and Trinity Rivers.
Central Valley Project and Trinity River Division
The TRD is one of nine divisions of the Central Valley Project (CVP). The TRD consists of
Trinity and Lewiston dams and reservoirs, as well as associated powerplants, tunnels,
dams, reservoirs, and other features. The TRD is operated and maintained by the U.S.
Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation). The primary purpose for the TRD was to increase the
II RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC ( CAH619.DOC)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
supply of water for irrigation and other beneficial uses in the Central Valley of California.
Congress stated that “surplus” water could be exported without detrimental effects to
Trinity River fish and wildlife. From 1965-97 an average of 988,000 acre-feet (af) was
exported annually from the Trinity River into the Central Valley (range 218,000-1,799,000),
representing about 74 percent of the inflow above Trinity Dam.
Exported Trinity River water is used for irrigation, municipal and industrial uses (M&I),
hydropower, and fish and wildlife purposes in the Central Valley and Bay-Delta. The CVP
supplies irrigation water to approximately 200 water districts, individuals, and companies
through annual contracts for 4.5 million acre-feet (maf) of water. M&I water is supplied to
40 districts and utilities through contracts for 0.5 maf. The CVP includes 20 reservoirs, with
combined storage capacity of 11 maf; 9 powerplants and 2 pumping-generating plants with
a maximum capacity of 2 million kilowatts (kW); and approximately 500 miles of major
canals and aqueducts.
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC ( CAH619.DOC) III
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
NEPA and CEQA
The FEIS/EIR is intended to comply with both the federal National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). By preparing a single
document that complies with both statutes, the involved agencies have avoided duplication
of effort. The statutes are similar in that they require federal and state agencies to consider a
range of alternatives to meet the project purpose, to evaluate the impacts of the alternatives,
and to disclose the alternatives and impacts to the public prior to making a commitment of
resources. The statutes differ in several ways, two of the more substantive being:
• CEQA requires state agencies to implement feasible mitigation whereas NEPA requires
only that federal agencies consider mitigation
• CEQA requires that proposed actions be compared to existing conditions whereas
NEPA requires only that they be compared to future conditions without the project.
Description of Alternatives
Alternatives were developed to provide a reasonable range of actions that satisfied the
purpose and need (per NEPA), and goals and objectives (per CEQA), and were feasible.
Alternatives were selected based on public input, scientific information, and professional
judgement.
Preferred Alternative
The Flow Evaluation Alternative, coupled with additional watershed protection efforts
(described in the Mechanical Restoration Alternative), was identified as the preferred
alternative because it best meets the purpose, need, goals, and objectives, while also
minimizing adverse impacts. In addition, the preferred alternative achieved the following
screening criteria, which were jointly developed by the four co-leads (Service, Reclamation,
Hoopa Valley Tribe, and Trinity County). The preferred alternative:
• Substantially increases natural production of anadromous fish on the Trinity River
mainstem
• Substantially restores inriver and ocean fishing opportunities
• Improves tribal access to trust resources
• Balances environmental and social beneficial and adverse impacts across the Trinity
River Basin, Lower Klamath River Basin/Coastal Area, and the Central Valley Basin
while meeting the mandate from the SWRCB in Water Rights Orders 90-05 and 90-01 to
cause no harm to the Trinity River fishery as a result of diversions to the Sacramento
River for temperature control
• Allows for the continued operation of the TRD including water exports
• Limits flooding impacts on the Trinity River
Given these criteria, the co-leads determined that the Flow Evaluation Alternative
represented the best overall approach to substantially increasing natural production of
IV RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC ( CAH619.DOC)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
anadromous fish and fishing opportunities, while allowing for continued water exports and
flood control. The proposed watershed protection activities were included as part of the
preferred alternative because: (1) they have been shown to help restore fish habitat by
reducing sediment inputs to the Trinity River mainstem; (2) they are consistent with the
Record of Decision (ROD) for the Northwest Forest Plan and its Aquatic Conservation
Strategy to reduce upslope sediment production by improving drainage on necessary roads,
while also decommissioning roads that no longer serve management purposes; (3) they are
consistent with the Total Maximum Daily Load process established under the Clean Water
Act, which has identified the Trinity River as a waterbody impaired by sediment and in
need of remedial measures; and (4) a broad range of interest groups specifically requested
that non-flow watershed protection measures be fully considered for inclusion into the
preferred alternative.
The 600 thousand acre-feet (taf) carryover storage level associated with the Flow Evaluation
Alternative would be maintained for the Preferred Alternative except in exceedingly dry
years if deemed necessary to avoid potentially infeasible operations at Shasta Dam. In such
years (identified as potentially occurring in the future per the modeling analysis under the
cumulative scenario), carryover storage would be reduced to 400 taf.
No Action Alternative
The No Action Alternative represents the anticipated future condition in the year 2020 in the
absence of project implementation. No Action assumes no implementation of any of the
provisions or programs of the CVPIA, and is, therefore, identical to the No Action
Alternative in the CVPIA Programmatic EIS (PEIS) being completed by Reclamation.
Under this alternative, approximately 340 thousand acre feet (taf) of water would be
released annually down the Trinity River (actual releases may vary due to Safety of Dam
releases and other unscheduled events). The remaining water, approximately 870 taf (on
average), would be exported to the Central Valley (Table ES-1). Peak Trinity River releases
of 2,000 cfs would occur around mid-May; flows during the remainder of the year would
range from 300-450 cfs. This alternative assumes that the 27 existing channel rehabilitation
projects would be mechanically maintained and that approximately 3,400 cubic yards (yd3)
of spawning gravel would be placed in the river every year. The alternative also assumes
that other ongoing TRRP projects—such as dredging sediment-control ponds and operation
of Buckhorn Reservoir—would continue.
Maximum Flow Alternative
This alternative calls for operating the TRD solely to store and release into the Trinity River
all inflow on a prescribed pattern by year type. Scheduled annual releases would average
1,225 taf, ranging from 463 taf in critically dry water years to 2,146 taf in extremely wet
water years. Peak releases of 30,000 cfs would occur for about 5 days in May in extremely
wet water years. No water would be exported to the Central Valley. The large flows
associated with this alternative would reshape and maintain the geomorphology of the river
without the aid of mechanical maintenance except for placement of spawning gravel.
Spawning gravel needs would average 16,400 yd3 annually, but could be 100,000 yd3 or
greater in extremely wet water years. Achieving the large releases called for under this
alternative would require modification of Trinity Dam.
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC ( CAH619.DOC) V
TABLE ES-1
Summary of Impacts
Compared to No Action
Preferred
Hydrologic Alternative to
Conditions or No Action in Maximum Percent Mechanical State Existing
Issue Other Variable Year 2020 Flow Flow Study Inflow Restoration Permit Conditions
Releases into Trinity River Critically Dry 340,000 af +36% +9% -51% 0% -65% +9%
Dry 340,000 af +160% +33% -5% 0% -65% +33%
Normal 340,000 af +250% +90% +30% 0% -65% +87%
Wet 340,000 af +340% +110% +93% 0% -65% +110%
Extremely Wet 340,000 af +530% +140% +190% 0% -65% +140%
Trinity River Exports to Dry Periods 540,000 af -100% -30% -2% 0% +39% -28%
Central Valley
Long-term Average 870,000 af -100% -28% -16% 0% +23% -28%
Trinity Reservoir Elevation Dry Periods 2,214’ msl +57' +11' +18' No Change +4' +8'
on Sept. 30
Long-term Average 2,285' msl -12' +1' +1 No Change +8' -3'
Shasta Reservoir Dry Periods 933' msl -65' -11' -1' No Change +3' -17'
Elevation on Sept. 30
Long-term Average 992' msl -15' -3' No No Change +4' -6"
Change
Delta Inflow Dry Periods 11,830,000 af -2% -1% 0% 0% +2% -1%
Long-term Average 22,570,000 af -4% -1% -1% 0% +1% -1%
Delta Outflow Dry Periods 6,320,000 af -1% 0% 0% 0% -1% 0%
Long-term Average 14,710,000 af -3% -1% -1% 0% +1% -4%
Exports at Tracy and Dry Periods 3,670,000 af -5% -2% 0% 0% +6% -3%
Banks Pumping Plants in
Long-term Average 5,950,000 af -6% -1% 0% 0% +1% +6%
the Delta
CVP Deliveries North of Dry Periods 2,680,000 af -6% -4% 0% 0% +2% +8%
Delta
Long-term Average 3,120,000 af -4% -1% 0% 0% +1% 11%
CVP Deliveries South of Dry Periods 1,580,000 af -13% -3% +1% 0% +13% -6%
Delta
Long-term Average 2,570,000 af -13% -2% 0% 0% +2% -3%
Days with Trinity River Critically Dry 78% (12%) 29% (0%) 6% (8%) 100% 78% (12%) 100% (12%) 84% (12%)
Temperature Violations— (13%)
State standards (percent Dry 24% (8%) 29% (2%) 1% (6%) 87% 24% (8%) 43% (15%) 0% (8%)
of the year in violation of
(12%)
Hoopa Valley Tribe
temperature standards)
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC-VI (CAH619.DOC)
TABLE ES-1
Summary of Impacts
Compared to No Action
Preferred
Hydrologic Alternative to
Conditions or No Action in Maximum Percent Mechanical State Existing
Issue Other Variable Year 2020 Flow Flow Study Inflow Restoration Permit Conditions
Normal 2% (31%) 28% (6%) 1% (15%) 86% 2% (31%) 61% (35%) 3% (31%)
(29%)
Wet 0% (27%) 28% (6%) 0% (8%) 72% 0% (27%) 86% (31%) 0% (27%)
(23%)
Extremely Wet 0% (0%) 73% (10%) 0% (0%) 53% (6%) 0% (0%) 59% (6%) 0% (0%)
Months Sac. River Temp. Long-term Average 16% 23% 20% 20% 20% 16% 14%
Violations
Years Shasta Res. Long-term Average 12% 14% 12% 12% 12% 10% 9%
Carryover Violations
Trinity Escapement as % - .08 .81 .66 .23 .18 .00 .08
of TRRPa Goals
Trinity River Fish - 11,300 +909% +741% +186% +117% -100% 0%
Harvested
Ocean Sportfishing - $42.2 +15% +14% +12% +11% -11% 40%
Benefits (millions)
Gross Commercial - $19.0 +45% +41% +28% +26% -37% -
Salmon Revenue
(millions)
Index of Restoration of - .08 .81 .66 .23 .18 .00 .08
Trinity River Tribal Assets
Rank of ability to Restore - 5 1 (Best) 2 3 4 6 5
Vegetation to Pre-Dam
Conditions
Trinity River Visitor Days - 317,200 +33% +22% -2% 0% -39% +79%
Lower Klamath River - 13,200 +28% +24% +8% +5% -5% +84%
Visitor Days
Trinity Reservoir Visitor - 803,600 -5% +0% +1% 0% +5% +66%
Days
Shasta Reservoir Visitor - 5,682,700 -8% -2% 0% 0% +2% +60%
Days
Flooding Impacts to Trinity Properties/Cost 0/0 112/$14.3 1/$5.0 16/$6.0 0/0 0/0 0/0
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC-VII (CAH619.DOC)
TABLE ES-1
Summary of Impacts
Compared to No Action
Preferred
Hydrologic Alternative to
Conditions or No Action in Maximum Percent Mechanical State Existing
Issue Other Variable Year 2020 Flow Flow Study Inflow Restoration Permit Conditions
River (excluding spills) (millions)
CVP M&I Deliveries to Dry Periods 82,000 af -17.8% -12.2% +1.5% 0% +7.9% -9%
Sacramento Valley
Long-term Average 106,000 af -13.3% -3.5% -0.6% 0% +2.4% -22%
CVP M&I Deliveries to Dry Periods 21,000 af -1.2% -0.4% +0.4% 0% +2.1% -14%
San Joaquin Valley
Long-term Average 27,000 af -2.2% -0.4% -0.1% 0% +0.5% -11%
CVP M&I Deliveries to Bay Dry Periods 231,000 af -35.6% -22.4% +4.7% 0% +20.7% +8%
Area Long-term Average 279,000 af -24.8% -5.1% -0.3% 0% +5.1% -6%
San Joaquin Valley Dry Periods $5,168 +0.1% +0.1% 0.0% 0% +0.1% +15.6%
Agriculture (millions) Long-term Average $5,195 -0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0% +0.0% +15.6%
Tulare Basin Agriculture Dry Periods $4,513 +0.2% +0.1% 0.1% 0% +0.1% +18.4%
(millions) Long-term Average $4,557 -0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0% +0.0% +17.8%
San Felipe Unit Agriculture Dry Periods $63 -25.8% -9.9% +3.6% 0% +37.8% -16.4%
(millions) Long-term Average $98 -31.1% -6.0% -1.6% 0% +5.2% -9.8%
CVP Hydropower Energy Dry Periods 2,946 GWh -25% -7% +1% 0% +9% -
Long-term Average 5,169 GWh -21% -6% -3% 0% +4% -
Value of Hydro-power Long-term Average -$26.0 -$5.6 -$7.0 $0 +$5.9 $9,029
(millions)
Cost per MWh for Ave. Synthetic Ave. Year +$0.96 +$0.21 +$0.26 $0 -$0.22 $0.33
Customer
Implementation Costs Total Cost 1998- $1.5 $30.3-$80.2 $71.8-$115.8 $13.8 $74.3 $1.6 -
1998-2020 (excluding 2020 (millions)
mitigation and ongoing
Major Expense Spawning Modify Dams Channel Rehab. Channel Channel Rehab. Spawning -
TRRPa projects) b Gravel and Spawning and Adaptive Rehab- and Watershed Gravel
Gravel Manage. ilitation Protection
aTrinity River Restoration Program
bMitigation
includes residence and bridge relocation/modification, reservoir boat ramp modification, and other costs. Other TRRP projects include dredging of sediment
ponds, operation of Buckhorn Dam, operation of the Trinity River Salmon and Steelhead Hatchery, and other projects.
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC-VIII (CAH619.DOC)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Flow Evaluation Alternative
This alternative is based on the recommendations in the TRFE. Under this alternative,
scheduled annual Trinity River releases would average 595 taf, ranging from 369 taf in
critically dry water years to 815 taf in extremely wet water years. Peak releases of 11,000 cfs
would occur for 5 days in May in extremely wet water years. Forty-seven mechanical
channel rehabilitation projects would be constructed because flows would be too low to
initiate necessary geomorphic changes. Approximately 10,300 yd3 of spawning gravel could
be added to the river annually depending on year type and river condition. The alternative
also calls for implementation of an adaptive management program. Adaptive management
is a process that uses scientific methods to develop and test various management choices.
Adaptive management is a valuable tool in managing systems or projects that are
characterized by complexity, change, and uncertainty.
Percent Inflow Alternative
This alternative approximates natural flow patternsBat a reduced scaleBby releasing water
into the Trinity River at a rate of 40 percent of the previous weeks inflow into Trinity
Reservoir. Historical records suggest that Trinity River releases would average 500 taf
annually (range 165-978 taf) with a peak release around 11,000 cfs. This alternative includes
the mechanical construction of 47 channel rehabilitation projects. Spawning gravel needs
are estimated to average 950 yd3 annually (range 0-4,650 yd3 ).
Mechanical Restoration Alternative
This alternative uses the same water management as No Action (i.e., annual releases of
340 taf). It builds upon No Action by constructing 47 new channel rehabilitation projects,
mechanically maintaining both new and existing projects, and dredging 10 pools in the
Trinity River mainstem. Spawning gravel needs would be the same as No Action. The
alternative includes an ambitious watershed protection program (road decommissioning,
maintenance) to reduce sediment input into tributaries and subsequently, the mainstem.
State Permit Alternative
This alternative was evaluated because it is the minimum flow under Reclamation=s existing
water permit with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Evaluating the
impacts of this alternativeBeven though it does not satisfy the purpose and needBfacilitates
amending the existing SWRCB permit. The alternative would reduce scheduled Trinity
River releases to 120.5 taf annually, regardless of water-year class. Peak releases would be
250 cfs for 30 days in November. No mechanical channel rehabilitation projects would be
created or maintained. Spawning gravel placement would average 3,700 yd3 annually, all of
which would be associated with unscheduled releases (e.g., Safety of Dam releases).
Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences
The affected environment was generally divided into three geographic regions; the Trinity
River Basin, the Lower Klamath River Basin/Coastal Areas, and the Central Valley.
The majority of the impact analyses depended, either directly or indirectly, on two models:
the Project Simulation Model (PROSIM) and the healthy river model. PROSIM is a
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC ( CAH619.DOC) IX
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
computer model that is used to predict changes in CVP and State Water Project (SWP)
operations under differing management and hydrologic scenarios. The model predicts
monthly changes in water volumes at discrete points (e.g., reservoirs) in the CVP and SWP.
Assumptions concerning operations (e.g., legal requirements), population growth, and land
use changes were entered into the model. For purposes of the FEIS/EIR, the model used
historical hydrological data from 1922-1990. The alternatives were assessed by using either
the PROSIM output directly, or by using other models which used the PROSIM output as
input (e.g., hydropower generation and agricultural production models).
The healthy alluvial river model used a set of 10 alluvial river attributes to assess the ability
of the alternatives to restore the health of the Trinity River. The attributes were: (1) channel
geomorphology is spatially complex; (2) flows and water quality are predictably variable;
(3) channel-bed surfaces are frequently mobilized; (4) channel-bed surfaces are periodically
scoured and refilled; (5) fine and coarse sediment budgets are approximately balanced; (6)
channel periodically migrates; (7) channel has a functional floodplain; (8) channel is
occasionally reset during very large floods; (9) riparian plant communities are diverse and
self-sustaining; and (10) the groundwater table fluctuates naturally with changing stream
flows. The healthy alluvial river model was used to directly or indirectly assess changes in
Trinity River geomorphology, fish populations, plant and wildlife communities, and other
impacts.
Geomorphic Environment
Rivers are comprised of three primary building blocks: various sizes of sediment, varying
amounts and stages of vegetation, and varying amounts of water. The interaction of these
three building blocks can provide a diversity of physical structures, such as point bars and
riffle-pool sequences, that perform a variety of environmental functions including providing
habitat for fish. The Trinity River immediately downstream of Lewiston was once a
meandering alluvial river characterized by such features. Since operation of the TRD,
substantial portions of the river have developed berms that effectively channelize the river,
changing its habitat characteristics. A healthy alluvial river model was created to assess the
effectiveness of the alternatives in restoring pre-dam Trinity River attributes. No Action,
Maximum Flow, Flow Evaluation, Percent Inflow, Mechanical Restoration, and State Permit
scored 8, 81, 66, 23, 18, and 0 percent, respectively, using the model (a score of 100 would
fully achieve all the pre-dam attributes. The healthy alluvial river model was the founda-
tion on which several other analyses depended (e.g., Fisheries). Impacts to the geomorphic
environment in the lower Klamath River and Central Valley (i.e., Sacramento River) where
negligible.
Water Resources
TRD operations are integrated with operations of the Shasta Division to allow for maximiz-
ing the use of TRD exports for meeting agricultural, M&I, environmental (including fishery)
and Delta water quality needs. Water resources were assessed in terms of surface
hydrology and water management, and groundwater. Reclamation's PROSIM model (using
1922-90 hydrologic data) was the primary tool used in assessing changes in surface
hydrology and water management. Impacts to surface hydrology and water management
(i.e., CVP operations) were evaluated; however, these effects were not considered impacts to
X RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC ( CAH619.DOC)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
the environment per se, but rather, they were agents that lead to impacts assessed elsewhere
in the document (e.g., Water Quality). The most affected CVP contractor group is assumed
to be those holding water service contracts, given such contracts provide for reductions in
water deliveries of up to 100 percent in particularly dry years.
In contrast to surface hydrology and water management, effects on groundwater were
considered an environmental impact. Historically, extensive groundwater pumping
occurred in the Central Valley to meet agricultural needs, sometimes leading to severe
overdraft conditions and land subsidence. Although surface water development (e.g., CVP
and SWP) reduced reliance on groundwater, overdraft pumping still occurs. For example,
annual withdrawals in the San Joaquin area exceed groundwater yield by 200,000 af. The
analysis in the FEIS/EIR assumed that reduced CVP water deliveries would lead to
increased groundwater pumping in the Central Valley. Groundwater pumping in the
Trinity River Basin and lower Klamath River is negligible.
Trinity River Basin. Surface hydrology and water management effects to the Trinity River
in the year 2020 would not change under No Action assumptions. Under No Action and
Mechanical Restoration, Trinity River flows at Lewiston would remain the same as current
conditions (340,000 af/yr). These flows are generally higher than those in the two decades
following dam construction, but they are still far below pre-dam levels. As evidence of that,
340,000 af/yr represents the third lowest recorded and potential flow (based on Trinity
Reservoir inflows) at Lewiston since 1912. Maximum Flow, Flow Evaluation, and Percent
Inflow would, on average, increase releases above No Action levels by 263, 75, and
41 percent, respectively, whereas State Permit would reduce releases by 65 percent. The
effect of TRD releases on river flows decreases with distance downstream of the dam (most
dramatically, from the North Fork Trinity River confluence on down) due to the accretion of
flows from tributaries.
Lower Klamath River Basin/Coastal Area. Maximum Flow, Flow Evaluation, and Percent
Inflow would increase Klamath River discharges to the ocean by approximately 7, 2, and
1 percent, respectively. State Permit would decrease Klamath discharges by 2 percent.
These changes are generally negligible.
Central Valley. Under No Action and Mechanical Restoration the TRD would divert
approximately 870 taf annually to the Central Valley (actual diversions may be less due to
spills and Safety of Dam criteria). Under Maximum Flow, Flow Evaluation, Percent Inflow,
and State Permit the TRD would divert 0, 630, 730, and 1,070 taf, respectively. Maximum
Flow, Flow Evaluation, and Percent Inflow would reduce the amount of water delivered to
CVP contractors and Delta inflow. Under No Action conditions, groundwater pumping,
and associated land subsidence, would increase in some parts of the Central Valley (e.g.,
Yolo, San Joaquin/Tulare areas due to increased water demand driven by population
growth. Maximum Flow would substantially exacerbate these effects. Flow Evaluation and
Percent Inflow would result in localized groundwater elevation declines and land
subsidence compared to No Action. Impacts would be most substantial in the vicinity of
areas dominated by water service contractors who are assumed to increase groundwater
pumping in response to reduced CVP deliveries.
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC ( CAH619.DOC) XI
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Water Quality
The primary water quality concerns in the FEIS/EIR are Trinity and Sacramento River water
temperatures, Trinity River turbidity, and Bay-Delta salinity levels. Criteria regarding
Trinity River temperature, turbidity, and sediment are administered by the North Coast
Regional Water Quality Control Board and the Hoopa Valley Tribe. The temperature
criteria were established to maintain cool water temperatures for the benefit of the fishery.
In regards to the Sacramento River, the 1993 biological opinion on CVP operational impacts
to the endangered winter run chinook salmon is a significant management criteria. The
opinion requires certain temperatures at various points in the Sacramento River for the
conservation of the species, and that Shasta Reservoir be operated to maintain at least 1.9
maf of storage on September 30. TRD exports are used in conjunction with Shasta releases
to assist in meeting the criteria.
Trinity River Basin. Flow Evaluation meets the state temperature criteria 99 percent or
more of the time in all water-year classes except critically dry, where the criteria are met
94 percent of the time. That compliance rate is substantially better than all the other alterna-
tives including No Action. The improvement is in large part, due to shifting TRD diversions
from spring to summer, thereby not allowing water to warm in Lewiston Reservoir. Use of
Trinity Powerplant bypass operations increases Flow Evaluation compliance with state
temperature criteria to 100 percent in all water-year classes, but no improvement was seen
with bypasses for Percent Inflow and Maximum Flow. Flow Evaluation meets the Hoopa
Valley Tribe’s temperature criteria an average of 92 percent of the time, with Maximum
Flow showing the best compliance at 96 percent. No Action, State Permit, and Percent
Inflow meet tribal temperature criteria an average of 83 percent, 78 percent, and 82 percent
of the time, respectively. Short-term exceedance of the state turbidity criteria could occur as
a result of the channel rehabilitation projects in Flow Evaluation, Percent Inflow, and
Mechanical Restoration. These projects would undergo site-specific environmental review
that could include mitigating measures to reduce turbidity. The watershed protection work
in Mechanical Restoration would reduce sediment inputs into tributaries, and subsequently,
into the Trinity River by 240,000-480,000 yd3/yr, which is approximately 9-17 percent of the
average annual sediment produced in the basin.
Lower Klamath River Basin/Coastal Area. Lewiston Dam releases would have a negligible
concern on lower Klamath River temperatures due to the large water volumes in the
Klamath and the accretion of tributary inflow to the Trinity River below the dam. The
watershed protection work in Mechanical Restoration could result in minor reductions to
lower Klamath sediment loads.
Central Valley. Model simulations indicate that increased water demands due to popula-
tion growth and other factors not related to the alternatives in the FEIS/EIR would increase
temperature violations in the Sacramento River from 14 to 16 percent from 1995 to 2020.
Flow Evaluation increased the violation frequency to 20.5 percent, with all other alternatives
having less impact, except Maximum Flow, which increased to 22.8 percent. Maximum
Flow was the only alternative that increased Shasta carryover violations. Maximum Flow
would result in the largest reduction in Delta inflows, and therefore, the most adverse
impacts to Delta water quality conditions. The Flow Evaluation and Percent Inflow
alternatives were also identified to have modeled impacts to Delta water quality.
XII RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC ( CAH619.DOC)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Fishery Resources
The primary fishery resources in the Trinity River are chinook (fall and spring runs) and
coho salmon and steelhead (winter and summer runs). Pre-dam estimates of run size
suggest dramatic declines since construction of the TRD. For example, the post-dam natural
inriver spawning escapement for fall chinook is only 27 percent of the pre-dam estimate.
Current salmon and steelhead populations are all well below the Trinity River Restoration
Program (TRRP) goals (Table ES-2). Currently, Trinity River coho are listed as threatened
under the federal Endangered Species Act and steelhead are listed as a candidate species.
TABLE ES-2
Trinity River Restoration Program Goals and Recent Escapement Estimates
Recent Escapements as
Population Inriver Goals Percent-age of Goals Hatchery Goals Total Goals
Fall Chinook 62,000 20% 9,000 71,000
Spring Chinook 6,000 40% 3,000 9,000
Coho 1,400 14% 2,100 3,500
aWinter Steelhead 40,000 5%b 10,000 50,000
aGoalsfor summer steelhead have not been established. Recent estimates of run size range from 20-1,037;
pre-dam estimates upstream of Lewiston averaged 8,000.
bActual escapement may be higher because winter flows often preclude sampling.
Implementation of the alternatives for purposes of restoring the natural production of
anadromous fish in the Trinity River could also effect other fish populations in the river, in
the TRD reservoirs, and in the Central Valley and Bay-Delta. Federally listed species that
could be indirectly impacted include the endangered Sacramento River winter run chinook
and threatened Sacramento River spring run chinook salmon, Delta smelt, and Sacramento
splittail. Species proposed for federal listing that could be indirectly impacted include the
fall run of the Central Valley chinook salmon.
Trinity River Basin. Under No Action, the combined spawning escapement for chinook
and coho salmon and steelhead in the year 2020 would represent only 8 percent of the TRRP
goal. Maximum Flow, Flow Evaluation, Percent Inflow, and Mechanical Restoration would
increase the spawning escapement to 81, 66, 23, and 18 percent of the goals, respectively.
The alternatives would likely also improve conditions for resident native and non-native
fish. The bass fishery in Trinity Reservoir would be adversely affected by Maximum Flow;
spawning and rearing indices fell below the target range in 10 percent of the simulated
years. Flow Evaluation and Percent Inflow could also adversely affect fish spawning in the
reservoir, but to a less than significant degree whereas State Permit would increase spawn-
ing habitat. (Inriver and reservoir sport fishing economics were assessed in the Recreation
section: The economic value of tribal inriver fishing was not assessed); however, tribes are
allocated 50 percent of the allowable harvest).
Lower Klamath River Basin/Coastal Area. The increased flows and other actions
associated with Maximum Flow and Flow Evaluation would substantially benefit native
anadromous fish in the lower Klamath River and coastal areas. Conversely, the decreased
flows associated with State Permit would have substantial adverse affects. For resident
native and non-native fish, the Maximum Flow and Flow Evaluation would also result in
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC ( CAH619.DOC) XIII
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
some improvement; the Percent Inflow and Mechanical Restoration would result in no
change compared to No Action; and the State Permit would result in adverse impacts.
Ocean commercial and sport fishing would benefit substantially under Maximum Flow and
Flow Evaluation. The largest benefits would occur in the Klamath Mountain Zone (KMZ)
regions in California and Oregon and the Mendocino Coastal Area in California where
salmon landed, gross harvest revenue, and net harvest income to commercial fishers would
all increase from 425-933 percent over No Action levels and economic benefits to sport
fishing (including both private and charter boat operators) would increase 52-74 percent.
Benefits in the San Francisco and Monterey regions would be minor or non-existent.
Central Valley. Compared to 1995 existing conditions, No Action showed adverse
temperature related impacts to Sacramento River salmon due to increased water demands
in 2020. Maximum Flow, Flow Evaluation, and Percent Inflow showed adverse impacts
above those in No Action. Impacts to fishery economics in the Central Valley would be
negligible.
Tribal Trust
The importance of the Trinity and Klamath Rivers to the Hoopa and Yurok Tribes is evident
by the location and shape of the reservations. The 144-square-mile Hoopa Valley Indian
Reservation is bisected by the lower portion of the Trinity River and the Yurok Reservation
is bisected by the Klamath River from its mouth to the confluence with the Trinity. A wide
variety of trust assets, ranging from fish to riparian plants to wildlife, could be affected by
the alternatives. Therefore, it was decided to use the healthy alluvial river model as a tool
for assessing impacts to tribal assets. The FEIS/EIR focuses on the Hoopa Valley and Yurok
Tribes; however, the alternatives could indirectly affect other tribes in the region.
Trinity River Basin and Lower Klamath River Basin/Coastal Area. Based on the healthy
alluvial river model, the Trinity River would exhibit in the year 2020 approximately
8 percent of the attributes it had prior to the dams. In contrast, Maximum Flow, Flow
Evaluation, Percent Inflow, Mechanical Restoration, and State Permit would result in a
Trinity River in the year 2020 that exhibits 81, 66, 23, 18, and 0 percent, respectively, of the
pre-dam attributes. Maximum Flow and Flow Evaluation were determined to provide
substantial benefits to tribal assets whereas Percent Inflow and Mechanical Restoration
provided only marginal improvements.
Vegetation, Wildlife, and Wetlands
Prior to dam construction, the hydrograph of the Trinity River was characterized by high
winter and spring flows and greatly reduced summer flows, with great inter-year
variability. The result was a mosaic of early-successional (a young vegetation community)
willow-scrub vegetation and scattered patches of more mature willow-alder and alder-
dominated communities. Due to the TRD, riparian vegetation has increased by 300 percent
in the 40 river miles immediately downstream of the dam. The vegetative communities
have also matured, with detrimental effects. Wildlife impacts were assessed for the bald
eagle, foothill yellow-legged frog, western pond turtle, and willow flycatcher. The eagle is
federally listed as threatened, the flycatcher is state listed as endangered. The frog and
turtle are rare riverine species that, along with the flycatcher, serve as indicators of impacts
to wildlife in general. Wetland acreage has likely declined since construction of the TRD
XIV RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC ( CAH619.DOC)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
because the river channel migrates less frequently and less area is now inundated by the
peak flows.
Trinity River Basin. Under No Action the harmful encroachment and maturation of
riparian vegetation would continue. Maximum Flow ranked best in restoring pre-dam
riparian conditions, followed by Flow Evaluation, Percent Inflow, and Mechanical
Restoration, in that order. State Permit would result in further degradation compared to No
Action levels. No Action would likely result in continued adverse impacts to the foothill
yellow-legged frog, western pond turtle, and willow flycatcher, whereas Maximum Flow,
Flow Evaluation, Percent Inflow, and Mechanical Restoration would all be beneficial as a
result of increasing suitable habitat. However, Percent Inflow may be most beneficial to the
frog and turtle because flows would coincide with natural hydrology. Flow Evaluation and
Percent Inflow could displace a small amount of remnant fringe wetlands in the short-term
as a result of the channel rehabilitation projects; however, it is anticipated that the increased
flows associated with the alternatives would result in more wetland acreage in the long-
term. State Permit would result in a decrease in wetland acreage.
Lower Klamath River Basin/Coastal Area. Significant impacts to riparian vegetation,
wildlife, and wetlands are not anticipated in this geographic area.
Central Valley. Significant impacts to riparian vegetation, wildlife, and wetlands are not
anticipated in this geographic area.
Recreation
Recreation related impacts were assessed for the Trinity River and for CVP reservoirs,
primarily Trinity and Shasta. Recreation related impacts include those to rafting, kayaking,
camping, swimming, boat ramps, and sport fishing. Impacts from Trinity River and lower
Klamath River sport fishing were assessed as part of the recreation assessment (commercial
fishing and ocean sport fishing were assessed under Fishery Resources; tribal fishing was
not evaluated from an economic perspective). Recreation impacts were assessed in terms of
opportunities, use (i.e., visitor days), and benefits (willingness to pay).
Trinity River Basin. All of the alternatives showed some benefits and some adverse
impacts to recreation opportunities on the Trinity River, depending on the activity, time of
year, and water-year class. Maximum Flow showed substantial improvement in terms of
river use and benefits, but adverse impacts at Trinity Reservoir due to the large fluctuations
in reservoir levels which makes boat ramps unusable substantially more often than is
expected under No Action. Flow Evaluation was the only alternative to show increases in
recreation use and benefits at both the river and reservoir, with reservoir recreation use and
benefits changing less than 1 percent. State Permit showed the most adverse impacts on the
river by a substantial amount (it essentially ended sport fishing), but it showed the largest
increase in reservoir use and benefits, although by a comparatively smaller margin. The
Trinity River is designated a federal and state Wild and Scenic River, primarily due to its
fishery. Maximum Flow and Flow Evaluation would be substantially better at meeting the
purposes of the designation than would the other alternatives.
Lower Klamath River Basin/Coastal Area. The only measurable recreation impacts on the
lower Klamath River were those related to sport fishing. Maximum Flow and Flow
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC ( CAH619.DOC) XV
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Evaluation substantially increased sport fishing use and benefits whereas State Permit
showed an adverse impact.
Central Valley. Maximum Flow substantially adversely impacted recreation use and
benefits at Shasta Reservoir. Flow Evaluation modestly adversely impacted reservoir
recreation whereas State Permit showed modest benefits.
Land Use
The Trinity and lower Klamath River Basins are comprised primarily of forested public
land; small communities occur along the Trinity and Klamath Rivers and some of their
tributaries. Land use in the Central Valley is dominated by agriculture. There are also
several large urban areas and numerous smaller communities. Impacts were assessed to
residential/M&I uses, agricultural uses, and real estate.
Trinity River Basin. Scheduled peak releases under No Action would not flood existing
residences and structures along the Trinity River; however, uncontrolled operational spills
have historically inundated such areas and could occur again in the future. Maximum Flow
would cause the most flood damage, followed by Percent Inflow, Flow Evaluation, State
Permit, and Mechanical Restoration, in that order. Maximum Flow would make
inaccessible 79 properties due to road and bridge flooding. Flooding impacts associated
with Percent Inflow would be larger than Flow Evaluation (even though their peak releases
are comparable) because the peak releases would likely coincide with high tributary
inflows. Impacts under State Permit could be slightly higher than No Action (even though
scheduled peak releases are less) due to the increased likelihood of major spill events. No
impacts to M&I or agricultural lands are anticipated. Based on the assumption that the
value of real estate adjacent to the Trinity Reservoir would increase with decreasing range
of reservoir surface-water fluctuations, Flow Evaluation ranked first overall in increasing
property values, followed by Maximum Flow, Percent Inflow and State Permit (tied), and
No Action and Mechanical Restoration (tied).
Lower Klamath River Basin/Coastal Area. Impacts to residential/M&I, agriculture, and
real estate are not anticipated in this region.
Central Valley. Under No Action and average hydrological conditions, M&I water supplies
in the CVP service areas would generally be adequate in the year 2020; however, drought
conservation and additional supplies would be needed during dry periods. Maximum Flow
would decrease M&I supplies by 8-13 percent over the long-term and 22 percent during dry
periods. Retail prices would increase by approximately one to two percent depending on
the subregion. Changes to CVP M&I supplies under Flow Evaluation and Percent Inflow
would be modest to negligible, with retail water prices increasing less than one percent over
the long-term. Conversely, retail water prices would decrease by less than one percent
under State Permit.
Potential impacts to agricultural production would be greatest for the Maximum Flow.
Alternative, given no TRD exports would occur under this alternative. Average long-term
deliveries would be reduced by 366,000 af; however, it was assumed that much of this
would be replaced by additional groundwater pumping (additional pumping would not be
an option in some areas so fallowed land could increase). Impacts to irrigated acres and
gross revenue would be especially severe to water service contractors (because of the nature
XVI RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC ( CAH619.DOC)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
of their contracts) such as those in the San Felipe Unit, Tehama-Colusa, and Westlands
service areas. Depreciation in land values could occur in these areas. Under Maximum
Flow, impacts during dry periods are proportionately less than those for No Action due to
the assumption that water conservation measures would be implemented. Flow Evaluation
and Percent Inflow would generally result in similar types of impacts to Central Valley
agriculture, although at a reduced scale. The additional deliveries resulting from State
Permit did not show large benefits due to the assumption that groundwater pumping
would be reduced accordingly. Maximum Flow also had the largest impact on real estate
values associated with Shasta Reservoir.
Power Resources
The CVP includes 11 hydroelectric generation facilities; the four TRD facilities (Trinity,
Lewiston, Judge Francis Carr, and Spring Creek powerplants) generate approximately
30 percent of all CVP power and are comparatively efficient due to the high elevation of the
reservoirs. CVP hydropower is transmitted and distributed throughout much of California
in an extensive power grid operated by the Western Area Power Administration. Due to
this extensive grid, regional analyses of power were not conducted. Hydropower produc-
tion is an authorized purpose of the CVP, but is subordinate to navigation, flood control,
water supply, fish and wildlife, and other purposes. Currently, about 30 percent of the
power generated by the CVP is used to operate the project (known as project use loads: e.g.,
the Delta pumps). Preference power customers (e.g., municipalities and irrigation districts),
of which there are 78, are specifically entitled to preference in terms of the remaining power.
Simulations of 1920-90 hydrologic data indicate that Maximum Flow, Flow Evaluation, and
Percent Inflow would reduce the long-term energy production of the CVP by 21, 6, and
3 percent, respectively. However, some of this loss power generation would be offset by
decreased project use loads as a result of reduced exports (e.g., less water would be pumped
from the Delta). Indeed, Flow Evaluation and Percent Inflow showed an increase in energy
available for sale in September during average conditions. Long-term power generation
would remain unchanged under Mechanical Restoration and increase four percent under
State Permit. Flow Evaluation and Percent Inflow were designed to delay TRD exports to
later in the summer (compared to No Action), in part to improve Trinity River tempera-
tures. A byproduct of that shift is an increase in on-peak power generation. The value of
hydropower generation impacts ranged from a loss of $26 million under Maximum Flow to
an increase of $6 million under State Permit.
Socioeconomics
For purposes of socioeconomics analysis the Trinity River Basin was defined as Shasta and
Trinity Counties, due to the interaction between the counties in regards to recreation-related
spending. Impacts to the Lower Klamath River Basin/Coastal Areas were assessed for each
of six different coastal regions between Monterey, California, and the Washington/Oregon
border.
Trinity River Basin. Projected growth in the Trinity/Shasta County area between 1995 and
2020 is expected to be modest compared to other parts of California. Indeed, Trinity County
experienced a slight population decline from 1996 to 1997, possibly due to the decline in the
timber industry. Nevertheless, natural resource related spending will likely continue to be a
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC ( CAH619.DOC) XVII
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
comparatively large portion of the regional economy. Maximum Flow showed a long-term
loss of a small number of jobs in the region due primarily to adverse impacts on Trinity and
Shasta Reservoirs (modifying Trinity Dam would result in a short-term increase). In
contrast, Flow Evaluation showed a small increase in jobs and $3.2 million in annual
economic output due primarily to increased recreation-related spending along the Trinity
River. Changes due to Percent Inflow and Mechanical Restoration were modest. State
Permit had the most adverse employment impacts.
Lower Klamath River Basin/Coastal Area. Socioeconomic benefits were substantial from
the Mendocino Coastal Area northwards. For example, the North/Central Oregon Coastal
area showed increases of 400-600 jobs for the alternatives that increased Trinity River flows.
About half of the jobs occurred in the commercial fishing and seafood processing sectors.
Total annual output in the region increased $36-51 million and income increased $13-19
million for the alternatives that increased flows. The Mendocino, KMZ-California, and
KMZ-Oregon Coastal Areas also showed improvements in commercial fishing and seafood
processing sectors, as well as in wholesale and retail trade and lodging sectors. In contrast,
the San Francisco Coastal Area showed adverse impacts as a result of the alternatives that
increase Trinity River flows, due primarily to reduced water deliveries (via the Sacramento
River) to agricultural contractors. The Monterey Coastal Area only showed impacts under
State Permit, which assumed that salmon harvests would be closed due to the virtual
elimination of Trinity River stocks.
Central Valley. The assumptions used in this FEIS/EIR project that the Central Valley will
undergo dramatic changes between 1995 and 2020. For example, under No Action it is
projected that the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys and Tulare Basin will experience
increases of approximately 725,000, 800,000, and 400,000 jobs, respectively, in the economic
sectors assessed. Similarly, economic benefits in the assessed sectors are projected to double
between 1995 and 2020. Model simulations showed that the alternatives that reduced TRD
exports would have adverse economic and employment effects in the Central Valley, and
that the degree of impact was correlated with the size of the exports. The economic sectors
most impacted would be miscellaneous retail, retail and wholesale trade, farm machinery
and equipment, and cotton production.
Cultural Resources
Trinity River Basin. Maximum Flow, Flow Evaluation, Percent Inflow, and State Permit
could result in some impact to cultural sites along Trinity and Lewiston Reservoirs as a
result of changing water-levels. All of the alternatives could result in impacts as a result of
activities—outside of the Trinity River floodplain—associated with spawning gravel
placement and/or channel rehabilitation projects. The watershed protection component of
Mechanical Restoration could result in impacts to cultural resources. All mechanical
ground-disturbing activities would go through site-specific environmental reviews prior to
implementation.
Lower Klamath River Basin/Coastal Area. Cultural resource impacts from any of the
alternatives are not anticipated in this geographic area.
Central Valley. Cultural resource impacts from any of the alternatives are not anticipated
in this geographic area.
XVIII RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC ( CAH619.DOC)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Air Quality
Trinity River Basin. Flow Evaluation, Percent Inflow, and Mechanical Restoration could all
result in some increase to airborne particulate matter (PM) as a result of activities associated
with the channel rehabilitation sites (e.g., access road building), acquisition and transporta-
tion of spawning gravel, dam improvements (Maximum Flow Alternative only) and other
actions involving heavy machinery. Mechanical Restoration impacts would likely be greater
since the alternative includes an extensive watershed protection program and perpetual
mechanical maintenance of channel rehabilitation sites.
Lower Klamath River Basin/Coastal Area. Air quality impacts from any of the alternatives
are not anticipated in this geographic area.
Central Valley. A decrease in water deliveries could result in fallowing some cropland
south of the Delta, with an associated minor increase in wind erosion and airborne PM if
effective cover crops are not planted.
Environmental Justice
Federal agencies are required to identify and address the disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects of their actions on minorities and low-
income populations and communities, as well as the equity of the distribution of the
benefits and risks of their decisions.
Trinity River Basin and Lower Klamath River Basin/Coastal Area. A high percentage of
Native Americans live in the Trinity and Klamath River Basins. They would be affected
from the alternatives in proportion to the alternatives' ability to restore the Trinity River,
especially the fishery. Under Maximum Flow, substantial environmental justice impacts
could occur to Hispanic populations (as a result of reduced irrigation) in Santa Clara
County, located in the San Francisco Coastal Area. No environmental justice impacts would
occur to non-Native Americans under the other alternatives.
Central Valley. Under Maximum Flow, substantial environmental justice impacts could
occur to Hispanic populations in Colusa, Merced, and Madera Counties. No environmental
justice impacts were observed under the other alternatives.
Other Impacts and Commitments
Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative impacts are the impacts on the environment which result from the incremental
impacts of the proposed action when added to other past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable future actions, regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or entity
undertakes such other actions. The proposed action in the FEIS/EIR may be implemented
in an interactive manner with other concurrent projects. In addition, those other projects
may affect the impacts of the proposed action. The cumulative impact analysis addressed
impacts associated with several related actions including:
• Implementation of CVPIA, including evaluation of the 3406(b)(2) water management for
upstream and Delta actions similar to those defined in the November 20, 1997
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC ( CAH619.DOC) XIX
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Administrative Paper released by Reclamation and the Service, as well as the October 5,
1999 Decision on Implementation of Section 3406(b)(2) of the CVPIA
• SWRCB water rights process
• CALFED Bay-Delta Program
• Deregulation of the electric industry in California
• Changes in federal farm support programs
• Changes in demand for agricultural products
• Changes to fisheries management
• Changes in demand/supply for timber products
• Changes in demand for recreational activities in the Trinity River Basin not related to the
Trinity River or the mainstem reservoirs
• Changes in Trinity River Basin Consumptive Water Use
Potential impacts associated with the Trinity River FEIS/EIR Preferred Alternative were
assessed in conjunction with other reasonably foreseeable actions relating to the CVP, most
notably the CVPIA PEIS preferred alternative were analyzed using the PROSIM model and
the assumption that CVP contractors take their full contract allocations in 2020. In conduct-
ing the initial cumulative impacts analysis it was found that the cumulation of the other
actions stressed the CVP to such a point that the project could not operate in some dry
years. Specifically, it was found that simulated storage levels in Shasta Reservoir during the
dry period (1928 - 1934) were below feasible operating levels. Therefore, a second cumula-
tive impact analysis (i.e., PROSIM run) was conducted with the assumption that the mini-
mum storage level in Trinity Reservoir would be reduced from 600 taf, (the assumed
minimum storage level for the Preferred Alternative) to 400 taf (the minimum storage for
No Action, but greater than the approximately 225,000 ac-ft threshold necessary to operate
the reservoir). This assumption was made toward being consistent with the assumptions
made for other CVP storage facilities, in that all other facilities were modeled to operate at
their operational limits. Using the 400 taf threshold as a floor, the 600 taf carryover
threshold was met in 80 percent of the modeled years (compared to 90 percent of the years
under No Action).
Overall, the cumulative effect of increased demand (due to increased population growth),
coupled with actions which would reallocate supplies, such as the CVPIA and some of the
alternatives described in this document, would decrease CVP deliveries in dry years. Full
deliveries to water service contractors would be less likely to occur. For example, full
deliveries to water service contractors south of the Delta would be reduced from 45 percent
of the years (under the existing conditions run) to 15 percent of the years in 2020 under the
cumulative impacts scenario. Years where no deliveries would be made to water service
contractors increased from one percent to seven percent.
As a result of increased water demand assumed for the cumulative impacts analysis,
minimum contract deliveries, and even deliveries to water rights holders, cannot be
maintained in the American River Division in some critically dry water years. In the San
XX RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC ( CAH619.DOC)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Joaquin Valley and the Tulare Basin the reduction in water deliveries would result in the
loss of irrigation to about 50,000 and 13,000 acres, respectively. In the San Felipe Unit there
would be a loss of irrigation to 15,000 acres and an associated loss of $26 million in gross
revenue as a result of the cumulative impacts.
TABLE ES-3
Cumulative Impact Water Deliveries
Simulated Annual CVP Deliveriesa (taf)
Preferred With
1995 Existing No Action in Alternative in Cumulative
Type of Period Conditions 2020 2020 Impacts
Long-term Average 5,380 5,690 5,600 5,460
Dry Period 4,020 4,260 4,100 3,870
Wet Period 5,860 6,200 6,180 6,270
a CVPdeliveries include deliveries to Agricultural and M&I Water Service Contractors,
Sacramento River water rights contractors, other water rights contractors, and San Joaquin River
Exchange Contractors. CVP deliveries do not include refuge water supplies.
Environmental Commitments and Mitigations
Table ES-4 presents significant impacts and potential mitigation.
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC ( CAH619.DOC) XXI
TABLE ES-4
Summary of Significant Adverse Environmental Impacts and Proposed Mitigation
Level of
DEIS/EIR Action Significance after
Alternative Description of Significant Impact Mitigation Mitigation
Water Resources
Groundwater
Maximum Flow Significant declines in groundwater levels Although changes to surface water supply per se were not considered an Significant
Flow Evaluation could occur in the Sacramento Valley impact, the development of additional water supplies to meet demands would
Percent Inflow and Tulare Basin regions, primarily in lessen the associated impacts (e.g., groundwater impacts). A number of
areas receiving CVP agricultural service demand- and supply-related programs are currently being studied across
contract water. California, many of which are being addressed through the ongoing CALFED
and CVPIA programs and planning processes. Although none of these
actions would be directly implemented as part of the alternatives discussed in
this DEIS/EIR, each could assist in offsetting impacts resulting from
decreased Trinity River exports. Examples of actions being assessed in the
CALFED and CVPIA planning processes include:
• Develop and implement additional groundwater and/or surface-water
storage. Such programs could include the construction of new surface
reservoirs and groundwater storage facilities, as well as expansion of
existing facilities. Potential locations include sites throughout the
Sacramento and San Joaquin Valley watersheds, as well as the Delta.
• Purchase long- and/or short-term water supplies from willing sellers (both
in-basin and out-of-basin) through actions including, but not limited to,
temporary or permanent land fallowing.
• Facilitate willing buyer/willing seller inter- and intra-basin water transfers
that derive supplies from activities such as conservation, crop modifica-
tion, land fallowing, land retirement, groundwater substitution, and
reservoir re-operation.
• Promote and/or provide incentive for additional water conservation to
reduce demand.
• Decrease demand through purchasing and/or promoting the temporary
fallowing of agricultural lands.
• Increase water supplies by promoting additional water recycling.
Maximum Flow The groundwater level declines could See above. Significant
Flow Evaluation result in increased land subsidence
Percent Inflow within limited areas within the San
Joaquin Valley and Tulare Basin regions.
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC-XXII (CAH619.DOC)
TABLE ES-4
Summary of Significant Adverse Environmental Impacts and Proposed Mitigation
Level of
DEIS/EIR Action Significance after
Alternative Description of Significant Impact Mitigation Mitigation
Maximum Flow Additional groundwater pumping could See above. Significant
Flow Evaluation result in upwelling of groundwater high in
Percent Inflow TDS into productive groundwater zones
within limited areas within the San
Joaquin Valley and Tulare Basin regions.
Water Quality
Flow Evaluation The channel rehabilitation projects would • A 401 water quality certification would be obtained from the NCRWQCB, Less than significant
Mechanical Restoration result in short-term Trinity River turbidity and a construction procedure would be developed to meet the Basin Plan
Percent Inflow impacts. turbidity requirements. Monitoring would be conducted as specified by
the NCRWQCB, and efforts would be taken to reduce levels if they are
20 percent or more over background (e.g., isolating the work area and/or
slowing or halting construction until the 20-percent level is achieved).
• Notify individual diverters with state diversion permits within 2 miles
downstream of any mechanical channel rehabilitation activity at least 2
days in advance of activities likely to produce turbidity.
Maximum Flow Violate temperature objectives and Significanta impacts identified for the increased frequency of temperature and Significanta
Flow Evaluation carryover storage criteria established in carryover storage violations were evaluated by NMFS. See mitigation for
Percent Inflow the Sacramento River winter run chinook water quality fish-related impacts under Fishery Resources.
salmon Biological Opinion.
(See also water supply related impacts under Groundwater.)
Maximum Flow Violate state temperature objectives Significant impacts identified for violation of state temperature objectives Significant
Percent Inflow established for the Trinity River. would be evaluated by the NCRWQCB. Consultation with NMFS would occur
State Permit pursuant to Trinity River coho salmon. Bypassing the Trinity Powerplant
could offset impacts to temperature in the Trinity River. Preliminary analysis
of powerplant bypasses indicates that pulling colder water from lower in the
reservoir could alleviate temperature impacts. Further evaluation of the
benefits and costs would be needed before a full assessment could be made.
Given the result of consultations and bypass analysis is unknown, this
significant impact is considered to be unmitigable at this time.
Maximum Flow Violate Hoopa Valley Tribe temperature Significant impacts identified for violation of tribal temperature objectives Significant
Percent Inflow objectives established for the Trinity would be evaluated by the Hoopa Valley EPA. Consultation with NMFS
State Permit River. would occur pursuant to Trinity River coho salmon. Bypassing the Trinity
Powerplant could offset impacts to temperature in the Trinity River.
Preliminary analysis of powerplant bypasses indicates that pulling colder
water from lower in the reservoir could alleviate temperature impacts. Further
evaluation of the benefits and costs would be needed before a full assess-
ment could be made. Given the result of consultations and bypass analysis is
unknown, this significant impact is considered to be unmitigable at this time.
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC-XXIII (CAH619.DOC)
TABLE ES-4
Summary of Significant Adverse Environmental Impacts and Proposed Mitigation
Level of
DEIS/EIR Action Significance after
Alternative Description of Significant Impact Mitigation Mitigation
Fishery Resources
Native Anadromous Species
State Permit Would affect native anadromous species Anticipated significant impacts to native anadromous salmonids in the Trinity Significant
utilizing the Trinity River due to River from implementation of this alternative would be unmitigatable.
inadequate habitat conditions and water
temperature.
Maximum Flow Violate temperature objectives and (See mitigation for water quality related impacts under Water Quality.) Significanta
Flow Evaluation carryover storage criteria established in Significant impacts requiring mitigation for adverse effects to anadromous
Percent Inflow the Sacramento River winter run chinook salmonids in the Sacramento River system associated with Maximum Flow
salmon Biological Opinion. and Percent Inflow Alternatives would need to be addressed during
reconsultation with NMFS. Significant impacts related to temperature
objectives and carryover storage criteria established in the Sacramento River
winter-run chinook salmon BO for the Flow Evaluation (Preferred Alternative)
were addressed through reconsultation under ESA with NMFS.
Per the NMFS’ Biological Opinion (2000; under separate cover), implemen-
tation of the Preferred Alternative is not likely to jeopardize Southern
Oregon/Northern California Coast (SONCC) coho salmon, Sacramento River
winter-run chinook salmon, Central Valley spring-run chinook salmon, or
Central Valley steelhead. The NMFS does anticipate that SONCC coho
salmon habitat adjacent to and downstream of the channel rehabilitation
projects associated with the Preferred Alternative may be temporarily
degraded during construction. Construction of these projects, which will
create a substantial amount of additional suitable habitat, may temporarily
displace an unknown number of juvenile coho salmon but is not expected to
result in a lethal take. The NMFS does not anticipate that the implementation
of the proposed action will incidentally take Central Valley spring-run chinook
or Central Valley steelhead, but that the Preferred Alternative will result in a
minute increase in the level of Sacramento River winter-run chinook
incidentally taken in all years except critically dry years. In such years,
Reclamation would be required to reinitiate consultation per the existing
Winter-run Central Valley Project Operations Criteria and Plan to develop
year-specific temperature control plans. Implementation of the following
reasonable and prudent measures specified in the NMFS BO to minimize the
effects of incidental take shall be non-discretionary and will result in
minimizing impacts of incidental take of SONCC coho salmon and
Sacramento River winter-run chinook salmon in all years including critically
dry years:
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC-XXIV (CAH619.DOC)
TABLE ES-4
Summary of Significant Adverse Environmental Impacts and Proposed Mitigation
Level of
DEIS/EIR Action Significance after
Alternative Description of Significant Impact Mitigation Mitigation
The Service and Reclamation shall:
1. Implement the flow regimes included in the proposed action (as
described in the DEIS/EIR, page 2-19, Table 2-5) as soon as possible.
2. Ensure that NMFS is provided the opportunity to be represented during
implementation of the Adaptive Environmental Assessment and
Management program.
3. Ensure that the replacement bridges and other infrastructure
modifications, needed to fully implement the proposed flow schedule, are
designed and completed as soon as possible.
4. Periodically coordinate with NMFS during the advanced development
and scheduling of the habitat rehabilitation projects described in the
DEIS/EIR.
5. Complete “the first phase of the channel rehabilitation projects” (U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 2000) in a
timely fashion.
6. Implement emergency consultation procedures during implementation of
flood control or “safety of dams” releases from Lewiston Dam to the
Trinity River.
7. In dry and critically dry water-year classes, Reclamation and Service
shall work cooperatively with the upper Sacramento River Temperature
Task Group to develop temperature control plans that provide for
compliance with temperature objectives in both the Trinity and
Sacramento Rivers.
Implementation of these measures will be non-discretionary.
Resident Native and Non-native Fish
State Permit Increased water temperatures, which Anticipated significant impacts to resident fish in the Trinity River from Significant
would reduce non-native Trinity River fish implementation of this alternative would be unmitigatable.
habitat.
Maximum Flow Impacts to Delta smelt and Sacramento Significant impacts requiring mitigation related to changes in Delta inflow and Significanta
Flow Evaluation splittail as a result of changes in Delta export ratios associated with Maximum Flow and Percent Inflow Alternatives
Percent Inflow inflow to export ratios. would need to be addressed during reconsultation with NMFS. Significant
impacts related to changes in Delta inflow and export ratios for the Flow
Evaluation (Preferred Alternative) were addressed through consultation under
ESA with the Service.
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC-XXV (CAH619.DOC)
TABLE ES-4
Summary of Significant Adverse Environmental Impacts and Proposed Mitigation
Level of
DEIS/EIR Action Significance after
Alternative Description of Significant Impact Mitigation Mitigation
Per the Service’s Biological Opinion (2000; under separate cover),
implementation of the Preferred Alternative is not likely to jeopardize delta
smelt and Sacramento splittail or adversely modify critical habitat for delta
smelt. The Service has concurred with the determination that implementing
the Preferred Alternative will not likely adversely affect the bald eagle and
northern spotted owl. It is anticipated that delta smelt and Sacramento
splittail will be adversely affected by implementing the Preferred Alternative
and that incidental take may be affected in manner or extent not analyzed in
the March 6, 1995 Biological Opinion on the Long-term Operation of the CVP
and SWP. Therefore, the following reasonable and prudent measure to
minimize the effects of incidental take was developed:
1. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) shall minimize the effects of
reoperating the Central Valley Project resulting from the implementation
of the Preferred Alternative within the Trinity River Basin on listed fish in
the Delta.
Implementation of this measure will be non-discretionary.
Reservoirs
Maximum Flow Impacts to largemouth and smallmouth A smallmouth and largemouth bass stocking program shall be instituted simi- Less than significant
bass spawning in Trinity Reservoir due to lar to the existing stocking program for coldwater species.
reduced water surface levels.
Ocean Fisheries Economics
State Permit Reduced angler benefits and net income No mitigation is available. N/A
of charter boat operators in the
Mendocino Region.
State Permit Reduced commercial fishing harvests No mitigation is available. N/A
and related economic benefits.
Tribal Trust
State Permit Reduced flows would lead to further No mitigation is available. Significant
decline in tribal access to trust resources.
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC-XXVI (CAH619.DOC)
TABLE ES-4
Summary of Significant Adverse Environmental Impacts and Proposed Mitigation
Level of
DEIS/EIR Action Significance after
Alternative Description of Significant Impact Mitigation Mitigation
Vegetation, Wildlife, and Wetlands
Vegetation
Maximum Flow Ground disturbing activities could result Conduct site-specific environmental reviews prior to mechanical ground- Less than significant
Flow Evaluation in a loss of vegetation and special-status disturbing activities. Such reviews shall, when appropriate, include surveys
Percent Inflow plant populations. for federal and state endangered, threatened, and proposed species, or for
Mechanical Restoration other species if required by permitting agencies (e.g., USFS). If such species
are present, actions shall be taken to avoid impacts.
Develop and implement a revegetation plan for all ground-disturbing activities
(excluding channel rehabilitation sites). Revegetation shall use plant species
found adjacent to the impact area or from similar habitats, subject to land-
owner and/or agency concurrence. Replacement ratios and monitoring plans,
if determined necessary, will be developed in cooperation with the Corps,
Service, and CDFG.
State Permit Further degradation of riparian vegetation No mitigation is available. Significant
due to reduced flows.
Wildlife
Flow Evaluation Direct mortality of foothill yellow-legged Conduct site-specific environmental reviews prior to mechanical ground- Less than significant
Percent Inflow frogs or egg masses, adult western pond disturbing activities. Such reviews shall, when appropriate, include surveys
Mechanical Restoration turtles and hatchlings, or willow flycatcher for federal and state endangered, threatened, and proposed species, or for
nests and young during construction (and other species if required by permitting agencies (e.g., USFS). If such species
maintenance for the Mechanical are present, actions shall be taken to avoid impacts (e.g., delay construction
Restoration) of the channel rehabilitation until after willow flycatcher chicks fledge).
sites.
State Permit Continued degradation and reduction of No mitigation is available. Significant
habitat as a result of reduced flows.
Wetlands
Flow Evaluation The mechanical channel rehabilitation Conduct pre-construction delineation of wetland areas at sites that may Less than significant
Percent Inflow projects could impact wetland resources. contain wetlands. Consult with the Corps on potential impacts to wetland
Mechanical Restoration resources. No mitigation is available.
Recreation
Riverine
Maximum Flow Impacts from flows to a number of Flow-related significant impacts would be unmitigable without changing the Significant
Flow Evaluation recreation activities for at least a portion flow release schedule which is inherent to the alternative.
Mechanical Restoration of the recreation season.
State Permit
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC-XXVII (CAH619.DOC)
TABLE ES-4
Summary of Significant Adverse Environmental Impacts and Proposed Mitigation
Level of
DEIS/EIR Action Significance after
Alternative Description of Significant Impact Mitigation Mitigation
Percent Inflow
Maximum Flow Impacts to public safety from river flows Post signs at river access points showing daily flows. Offer a toll-free tele- Less than significant
Flow Evaluation that are too high or too low (i.e., outside phone number so recreationalists can call to obtain daily flow information.
State Permit the preferred range for boating). Post daily flows on the Internet.
Percent Inflow
Maximum Flow Impacts to recreation activities from (See mitigation for water quality related impacts under Water Quality.) Less than significant
Flow Evaluation turbidity associated with the construction
Percent Inflow (and maintenance for Mechanical
Mechanical Restoration Restoration) of the channel rehabilitation
sites.
Reservoirs
Maximum Flow Increase the frequency at which Trinity All affected boat ramps should be extended a sufficient distance to accom- Less than significant
Flow Evaluation Reservoir boat ramps are unusable, modate the new water levels.
which would indirectly impact marinas Marina owners should be compensated for additional costs associated with
and campgrounds. moving their facilities or to construct new facilities to accommodate the new
water levels.
Campground facilities should be modified or funding provided to accom-
modate the revised operational approach.
Land Use
Residential/Municipal and Industrial
Maximum Flow Increased flooding of Trinity River Property owners could be compensated at fair market value for all flood- Significant
Flow Evaluation Percent structures and/or residences. related structure/improvement losses incurred, or funding would be provided
Inflow to retrofit structures /improvements to withstand peak flows.
Property owners who have parcels with buildable sites outside of the current
100-year floodplain that would be regularly inundated could be compensated
at fair market value for the loss of development rights to that parcel.
Given funding for these efforts is not yet been determined, this significant
impact is considered to be unmitigable at this time.
Maximum Flow Potentially significant M&I related impacts (See water supply related impacts under Groundwater.) Significant
as a result of decreased surface-water
supplies.
Agriculture
Maximum Flow Substantially decrease irrigated acreage (See water supply related impacts under Groundwater.) Significant
Flow Evaluation within the San Felipe Unit.
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC-XXVIII (CAH619.DOC)
TABLE ES-4
Summary of Significant Adverse Environmental Impacts and Proposed Mitigation
Level of
DEIS/EIR Action Significance after
Alternative Description of Significant Impact Mitigation Mitigation
Power
Maximum Flow Potentially significant power-related (See water supply related impacts under Groundwater. Power-related Significant
Flow Evaluation impacts from decreased surface-water benefits associated with such programs would only occur if operations were
Percent Inflow supplies. conducted to provide increased generation; otherwise, implementation of
such programs could negatively affect power resources.)
Operating criteria would be established to allow Western to respond to
various emergency situations in accordance with their obligations to the North
American Electric Reliability Council. This commitment would also provide for
exemptions to a given alternative's operating criteria during search and
rescue situations, special studies and monitoring, dam and powerplant
maintenance, and spinning reserves. Such exemptions for responding to
various emergency situations would be consistent with the Presidential
Memorandum, dated August 3, 2000, directing federal agencies to work with
the State of California to develop procedures governing the use of backup
power generation in power shortage emergencies.
Cultural Resources
Maximum Flow Impacts to cultural resources. Conduct cultural resource surveys of project areas (including areas of Less than significant
Flow Evaluation ancillary activities, such as staging areas, gravel mining areas, etc.) prior to
Percent Inflow ground disturbance.
Mechanical Restoration Areas containing cultural resources shall be demarcated and activities
planned to avoid these areas.
If cultural resources cannot be avoided, additional research or test
excavations (as appropriate) will be undertaken to determine whether the
resources meet CEQA and/or NRHP significance criteria.
Unavoidable impacts on significant resources would be mitigated for in a
manner that is deemed appropriate. Mitigation for significant resources may
include, but is not limited to, data recovery, public interpretation, performance
of a Historic American Building Survey or Historic American Engineering
Record, or preservation by other means.
Air Quality
Maximum Flow Spawning gravel placement and other Implement a dust control program, which includes: watering of stockpiles, Less than significant
Flow Evaluation heavy equipment work associated with roads, etc. as necessary, and identify an individual to monitor dust control and
Percent Inflow the alternatives would result in potentially to respond to citizen complaints.
Mechanical Restoration significant PM10 impacts as a result of
fugitive dust.
aThese impacts were identified as “significant” per the CEQA-related significance threshold standards described in Chapter 3.
RDD-SFO/992600002.DOC-XXIX (CAH619.DOC)